> You are agreeing with the author. He is presenting his opponent's viewpoint, with humorous exaggeration. You're right, page 3 winds that back as you say. >

> You are agreeing with the author. He is presenting his opponent's viewpoint, with humorous exaggeration. You're right, page 3 winds that back as you say. > That isn't his claim here. It's hard not to agree that books can be more polished. Of course, but he presents the timings as 50 minutes as against 10. That's not reflective of how long it would take a student to understand the material. > it limits the author's temptation to squeeze in one more thing, one more generalization. And because it puts the experienced speaker's thought process on show, not only the final tidied up result. I agree on both points.